Interviews with a Syrian army T-72 commanders

This is a discussion on Interviews with a Syrian army T-72 commanders within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Came across this very interesting and candid interview with Syrian army T-72 commanders. Has nice lots of nice footage! Interestingly ...

Came across this very interesting and candid interview with Syrian army T-72 commanders. Has nice lots of nice footage! Interestingly in the first video, he mentions that the turret mounted MG can't be fired from inside the turret - I was under the impression that on the T-72 and T-90 it could be fired from inside.

There were also some interview's with BMP-2 operators. It was interesting stuff. Gur Khan's blog has some detailed info, and other stuff on T-72 employment in Syria, including a detailed analysis of the destruction of a T-72 by a RPG-29 Vampir shot.

There was mention of the screws or the pins holding the side armour to hull not being strong enough and having the tendency to fall off. This I find surprising - surely the Russians and the Syrians would have discovered this years ago.

The Russian military has been slow in correcting a number of major and minor flaws that could relatively easily be fixed. For example if you look at the K-5 tiles arrangement on T-72 turrets you'll see gaps between the tiles. Given that they've been retrofitting K-5 to T-72s for over a decade now (more like two decades) you think they could've gotten tiles that fit. On the T-72B mod.2011 and the T-72B3 (the ones with thermals) there is a giant hole in the ERA tiles, where the Luna-4 used to be. Why they wouldn't cover it, I don't know. It doesn't much surprise me that on the Syrian T-72s there are problems with the attachment points for the side skirts. Then again, the Syrian T-72s are fairly old and mostly un-upgraded. There were rumors of T-72 upgrades for Syria, but I haven't seen the details.

Also, a T-72 with some interesting looking side-skirts was spotted in Syria. It looks almost like the side-skirts off of a T-90MS. Look at the first photo. Granted the Syrians don't seem to even have access to K-5, but they could've rigged up a similar arrangement using K-1.

What really surprises me is that on both sides of the turret [on some tanks] - towards the end - the only protection provided are the stowage bins and nothing else. In the video which shows a T-72 being hit from a Vampir it appears that the projectile hit the area I'm describing. Did you notice anything dodgy about the video, as to whether it might have been staged or had images/scenes inserted? Something else I was expecting to see but haven't are Syrian MBTs fitted with 'chicken wire' near the engine compartment to provide protection against RPGs and other shoulder launched weapons.

Also, for T-72 variants that are fitted with an A/C, where is the compressor fitted?

The RPG-29 has a tandem warhead. Cages aren't that effective at dealing with RPGs to begin with. My guess is that the RPG-29 would probably kill with a side or rear armor shot, no matter what else was on it. Even K-5 isn't great at dealing with tandem warheads. The new Relikt supposedly can, but we have yet to see it fielded. That having been said T-72Bs are not easy targets. There were many instances of T-72s in Chechnya taking over a dozen AT weapon shots, before being destroyed (or even surviving). It's more a question of employment then upgrades.

Also keep in a lot of the Syrian arsenal is T-72A, and M variants. Subpar variants even by 1980s standards. So yeah, they can be effective (and have been in Syria) when employed well and properly supported by infantry. However they're pretty old. At this point upgrading them might not even be the right way to go. Given that T-90S can be had at a little over 2.5 mil USD, if the Syrians were in a position to import weapons (be they upgrade kits or new vehicles) that would be the way to go.

There's some nice close ups on the modified armor of the T-72s and BMP-2s in Syria. You can see they're using basically anything they can. Bricks, rubble, and home made metal cages/screens. The additional protection is attached over the K-1 which makes me wonder. In the even of an impact, won't the detonation from the K-1 rip off all the additional armor? Anyways, this does show how desperate the Syrians are, and explains the strange looking fat side skirts on the T-72 in earlier pics.

What really surprises me is that on both sides of the turret [on some tanks] - towards the end - the only protection provided are the stowage bins and nothing else. In the video which shows a T-72 being hit from a Vampir it appears that the projectile hit the area I'm describing. Did you notice anything dodgy about the video, as to whether it might have been staged or had images/scenes inserted? Something else I was expecting to see but haven't are Syrian MBTs fitted with 'chicken wire' near the engine compartment to provide protection against RPGs and other shoulder launched weapons.

Also, for T-72 variants that are fitted with an A/C, where is the compressor fitted?

Hi, re the video dodgy bit, I too thought someting was a miss with the tank that was destroyed, I've seen 3videos of what appears to be the same 'action', one tank mounted, one APC mounted and from the Vampir group; interesting stuff. Fog of wat I guess!

I was wondering if anyone knew what the strange looking BMP chassis vehicle was. It looks like an ARV, but it's not the BREM-2 (which is the typical BMP-2 based ARV). It also doesn't look like the BREM-Ch.

When I look at the videos of armoured columns operating in Daarya I see lots of reasons why the armoured forces struggle so much.

Infantry support seems in short supply. One sees columns stopping out in the open on boulevards and plazas with no infantry around whatsoever. They try to lay waste to the surroundings with main gun fire but their fields of fire discipline is horrible and it seems rather uncoordinated. It definitely doesn't prevent enemy fighters from closing in and without infantry holding the surrounding buildings the rebels hava ample time to maneuver and bring an AT-Team into position.

Without TIs they also have massie problems identifying enemy fighters.

When I look at the videos of armoured columns operating in Daarya I see lots of reasons why the armoured forces struggle so much.

Infantry support seems in short supply. One sees columns stopping out in the open on boulevards and plazas with no infantry around whatsoever. They try to lay waste to the surroundings with main gun fire but their fields of fire discipline is horrible and it seems rather uncoordinated. It definitely doesn't prevent enemy fighters from closing in and without infantry holding the surrounding buildings the rebels hava ample time to maneuver and bring an AT-Team into position.

Without TIs they also have massie problems identifying enemy fighters.

Not good days to be a Syrian tanker...

Which is yet another reminder that it's not just the platform, but how it is employed and the supporting elements. Pillocks.

In close terrain and urban areas a stationary armoured column unprotected by dismounted infantry is a target. On an open rolling plain with little cover or concealment, infantry in the open are the targets for armoured columns. It's not rocket surgery